The Patient Deflection and Unaffordable Care Act

The Patient Deflection and Unaffordable Care Act

. . . is what I’ve been calling it for a year now, and as what was blatantly obvious about the monstrous lie of Obamacare becomes ever more apparent to more and more people, let’s take a walk down memory lane. Win some, lose some.

Does anyone — on either side — really think that the Patient Deflection and Unaffordable Care Act is about health care?

For if it’s about “health care,” aren’t there a myriad of ways in which the system could be improved without a “comprehensive” top-down solution? At a time of extreme economic dislocation, was there a nationwide clamor to make “health care” the top priority of the new administration?

Or is it really about the exercise of raw governmental power, to teach the citizenry an object lesson about the coming brave new world, one that surely will get even worse once Obama is safely past the shoals of his last election?

To believe in the “good intentions” of the former — as soft-headed conservatives are sometimes wont to do when crediting the hard Left with anything but sheer malevolence toward the country as founded — is to have to pretzel one’s mind around the internal contradictions of the bill itself (it’s a tax! It’s not a tax!) and the way in which it was imposed just a couple of years ago by a one-party Congress that no longer exists, having been rebuked and sent packing by an outraged electorate.

Far easier to believe in the latter — that Obamacare is just the canary in the coal mine of what’s coming next.

“When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth,” said Sherlock Holmes. The recent three-day intellectual demolition of Obamacare at the Supreme Court exposed to even the most obtuse lefty the flimsy constitutional underpinnings of the so-called “health care” law. The Patient Deflection and Unaffordable Care Act is now well on its way to zombie status, still staggering around in the form of HHS Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, knocking things off shelves and making growling sounds in the direction of religious folk, just waiting for the head shot from the Roberts Court to put it out of its misery.

As has become plainer every day, the “health care” bill was never about health care. In fact, it has nothing to do with health care or insurance at all. It simply uses one of the Left’s favorite “humanitarian” bludgeons, medical care and an invented fear of its absence, in order to persuade the gullible to forgo an important constitutional principle in exchange for wholly bogus, state-run “compassion.”

Whoops! Who knew that the Chief Justice, in a fit of moral cowardice, would change his mind at the eleventh hour and fail to pull the trigger — hard not to think he wasn’t reacting to the campaign of vilification Obama and the Left waged against him and the Court before the decision was announced.

Obama was the first Democrat to win a majority of the vote since Jimmy Carter in 1976, and that was a mistake the electorate quickly rectified with the two Reagan landslides. Four years of Nancy Pelosi were all the populace could stomach and it’s likely that the same will be true of Barack Obama. As the Patient Deflection and Unaffordable Care Act demonstrated, even with a supermajority the Democrats still had to resort to bribery, prevarication and legalistic chicanery to get it passed.

Of course, that assumes the GOP candidate can move past the “he’s in over his head” bromides and directly engage the great battle — the Cold Civil War — of our times. Obama’s never had to take a real punch, never had his core assumptions challenged, never been forced to defend his governing philosophy — which is why he reacts so petulantly when crossed. He’s got a glass jaw, which is something increasingly evident to the public; let’s hope it is to the candidate as well.

Most Popular

To understand the American gun-control debate, you have to understand the fundamentally different starting positions of the two sides. Among conservatives, there is the broad belief that the right to own a weapon for self-defense is every bit as inherent and unalienable as the right to speak freely or practice ...
Read More